I’ll attempt to describe contemporary moral naturalism by an analysis of cognitivist and non-cognitivist theories, elucidating a normative dichotomy in current ethics. Although a recent model in the history of philosophy, post-humean moral naturalism has a myriad of different theories under its name. I’ll attempt to delineate a standard definition of the naturalistic perspective of morality to then divide cognitivist and non-cognitivist theories in order to better understand key points of their difference. This will uncover a normative dichotomy between theories (...) of action, purely descriptive, and of value, which focuses on prescriptiveness. (shrink)

Kurrâ’ya nispet edilen aynı kelimelerdeki edâ farklılıklarının tartışmalara sebep olmasından ötürü kıraat ihtilafı olan kelimelerde ihticâc yapılmasına gereksinim duyulmuştur. Delil getirmek manasında kullanılan ihticâc kavramı, kıraat ihtilafları için söz konusu olduğunda ise kıraat ihtilaflarının sıhhat zemininin ortaya konması kastedilmektedir. Ayrıca 2. asrın sonlarında kıraat tevcîhlerinin yapıldığı müstakil eserler ortaya çıkmakla birlikte kıraat alan yazınına ait genel telifatlarda da kıraat ihticâclarının yapıldığı görülmektedir. Kıraat müelliflerinden biri olan İbnu’l-Cezerî de Neşru’l-ḳırââti’l-‘aşr adlı eserinde zaman zaman kıraat ihticâcına yer vermektedir. Mezkûr eserdeki kıraat ihticâcları (...) hakkında tespit edilebildiği kadarıyla yapılmış tek bir çalışma bulunmaktadır. Fakat bu çalışmada, kıraatten ve bunun dışındaki disiplinlerden yeterince istifade edilmediği belirlenmiştir. Ayrıca selef ulemasının Neşru’l-ḳırââti’l-‘aşr adlı esere ihticâc konusunda etkisi özelinde bir çalışmaya da rastlanmamıştır. Buradan hareketle elinizdeki bu çalışmada, İbnu’l-Ce-zerî’nin kıraat ihticâcına dair uygulamaları Neşru’l-ḳırââti’l-‘aşr adlı eser özelinde incelenmiş, me‘âni’l-Kur’ân ve me‘âni’l-kıraat literatürlerinin ortaya çıktıkları dönem dikkate alınarak h. 2.-4. asırlarda kaleme alınan bu literatürlere ait eserlerin İbnu’l-Cezerî’ye ait kıraat tevcîhlerine etkisinin olup olmadığı araştırılmıştır. Çalışmanın neticesinde İbnu’l-Cezerî’nin yaptığı kıraat tevcîhlerinden ele alınanların bir kısmına, söz konusu üç asırda kaleme alınan me‘âni’l-Kur’ân ve me‘âni’l-kıraat telifatında ekseriyetle yer verilmediği saptanmıştır. İbnu’l-Cezerî’nin ise kıraat ihtilafının olmadığı yerlerde dahi ilgili edâ için ihticâc yaptığı müşahede edilmiştir. Buna ilaveten İbnu’l-Cezerî’nin Neşr’de yaptığı ihticâc uygulamalarının me‘âni’l-Kur’ân ve me‘âni’l-kıraat telifatında yapılan ihticâc işlemleriyle benzeştiği görülmüştür. Yine Neşr’in tevcîh eseri olmaması hasebiyle de İbnu’l-Cezerî tarafından yapılan ihticâcların ihtiyaç merkezli olarak kendini gösterdiği belirlenmiştir. (shrink)

The problem of the article is based on a long tradition of studying the category ‘antinomy‘ in the history of philosophy from antiquity until the early twentieth century. Antinomical thinking has particular importance for the spiritual life in the 20th century. The author draws attention to the fact that, for example, in the poetry of Thomas Stern Eliot antinomies and paradoxes are of philosophical and religious nature especially in then dealing with questions of reaching the Truth by rational way exclusively. (...) The basic material for studies are the works of modern Russian poets Olesya Nikolaeva, Sergei Kruglov, Timur Kibirov, Olga Sedakova and Helen Schwartz. It is shown how moral and philosophical themes and descriptions of the spiritual lives of the characters associated with the interpretation of ideas of compositions in the form of antinomies. The idea of the influence of the antinomies of thinking on aesthetics and system of images of Russian poets verses is justified. Article reveals the originality of each of the poets whose poems are analyzed in the work. The author concludes that modern poetry gives traditional antinomies personal psychological nature, but at the same time, problems and poetics of paradox are in tune with thinking of twentieth century as a whole - with its disastrous spirit, full of doubt and contradiction. (shrink)

ABSTRACT Critical realist thought has theorised convincingly that epistemic relativism is constellationally embedded in ontological realism which in turn necessitates judgemental rationality. In social science, judgemental rationality involves acting upon plausible decisions about competing points of view. However, the tools for doing this are, as yet, under-articulated. This paper addresses this absence by articulating triangulation and depth-reflexivity as two tools for doing judgemental rationality in empirical research. It draws on the experiences of a diverse team working on an international comparative (...) research project on conversion to Islam in prisons. It demonstrates how epistemic and relational gaps between researchers and research subjects can be bridged by mobilising the ‘laminated’ properties and personal attributes of a diverse research team that factors in attributes that are absent as well as those present. The biographical experiences of the team are analyzed in a variety of intersecting dimensions: faith, ethnicity/ethno-culture, gender, class and professionality. (shrink)

I do not feel I have the authority to evaluate the individual speeches, much less to venture any conclusion sans appel. Let me just limit myself to some cursory comments about the course of today's conversation and the prospects of a further discussion of this extremely complicated and serious topic.

One of the most important problems for contemporary Catholicism is its dialogue with the contemporary world. In recent years, the leaders of the Catholic Church have been speaking of this with increasing frequency. The Catholic journal La Civiltà cattolica has even written of the need to found a "theology of dialogue" . The recent papal encyclicals - "Mater et Magistra" , "Pacem in Terris" , and "Ecclesiam suam" - express the effort of the leaders of Catholicism to establish more intimate (...) contacts with the world in which the religious people of today find themselves. It is therefore no accident that this problem of dialogue was taken up in discussions at the Second Ecumenical Council and particularly at its third session held in the autumn of 1964. (shrink)

The paper situates India’s global position with respect to its R&D and patent development and then highlights the current status of university system in India as a causative factor since majority of universities are busy in teaching merely how to qualify a paper-pencil test without much impetus on Research and Development. The paper also presents the perceived scenario of a national university and its characteristics. It also suggests ways in which universities can prioritize to produce researchers and innovators.

First of all, I should like to express my gratitude to the organizers of this discussion for their initiative in posing and debating the question of Soviet philosophy. I cannot but note the timeliness of this question: today we are sobering up from the mindless nihilism toward all that is "Soviet" and we observe an increasingly sober and realistic, balanced, and analytic approach to the assessment of our past history, including the history of Russian social thought. Indeed, we cannot dismiss (...) as nonexistent or nonessential the range of problems touching on the nature and character of Soviet philosophy and its social functions. In my opinion they exist and they are essential in any event, even when it is claimed that Soviet philosophy was only a failure, a "hole" in the history of Russian philosophical thought. There are several questions: what caused this failure, who is responsible for it, and can one in that case describe Marxist philosophy as the absence of philosophy? (shrink)

In recent years the term "dialogue" has taken on a special nuance and, in the literature, usually refers to specially organized gatherings between Marxists and Christians. Intense arguments rage around the "dialogue." An extensive literature contains the most diverse explanations of its origins and content, objectives and possible outcomes. An attempt "on the run" to smash through this picket fence of judgments and single out some "rational core" is hardly promising in the final analysis. Another path is required, reconstructing the (...) very mechanism of the appearance of various evaluations out of some initial material, independent of the opinions of the theorists of the "dialogue." There appears to be no need for recourse to the history of the "dialogue," which is sufficiently known. Let us cite only certain factors. (shrink)